If you want a good laugh, check out Abanes' response in an article he wrote, and how high-minded he is of himself, how much smarter he is then us poor non-Purpose-Driven schlubs, and how he never once answers the question, "What was so libelous about what Pastor Silva wrote?" He also turns himself into a pretzel by saying, "I never threatened to sue," yet he publishes snippets of his email to IPOWER that mentions "turning the matter over to my attorneys." Nah, no threat of legal action there. This response from Abanes is especially telling [all emphases mine]:

DT: I along with Chris R. and Pastorby want to see what in Ken’s article was slanderous or would qualify as libel? No red herrings please.

ABANES: I don’t really need to justify anything in detail. Those who need to know how I see the article, and why I see it that way, know the specifics. So, as I have just stated: “…at this point, I am inclined to simply say, “Believe what you will.” I think if you read the original blog post, as well as my MANY answers, enough information is there to take a position in your mind. Whatever it is — blessings.

Look up and see how hard I have trued to answer innumerable posts. I gave it my best effort. If it’s not good enough. That’s fine with me. I have found that more often than not, people are going to believe what they want to believe anyway.

R[ichard] A[banes]

Well, since we can no longer find Pastor Silva's original article, it would behoove Mr. Abanes to say what was so libelous, rather than just give some nebulous answer of "He libeled me."